Objective: To compare ultrasonography (US) and computed tomography (CT) data for evaluation of abdominal
Study Design: Validation study.
Place and Duration of Study: Radiology Department Combined Military Hospital Rawalpindi, from Apr 2006 to
Material and Methods: This study involved 67 patients. Both ultrasonography and computed tomography were
performed on each patient for evaluation of different variables of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Sensitivity,
specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy and p-values were
calculated for all qualitative variables separately. Mean and standard deviation (SD) were calculated for the
Results: Ultrasound measurements of abdominal aortic aneurysm were both accurate and reproducible.
The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonography for abdominal aortic aneurysm were >90% for all attributes,
with minor differences usually resulting from measurement variation rather than failure to distinguish between
large aneurysms and normal aortas.
Conclusion: Ultrasound was equally effective in comparison with computed tomography not only in diagnosing
abdominal aortic aneurysm but also in assessing its different attributes.
Aortic aneurysm, Computed tomography, Ultrasonography.